Nancy Reagan on a Wife’s Duty to Protect Her Husband
Throughout history there have been bold, audacious and successful political coups, but the greatest of them occurred when Nancy Reagan assumed the presidency of the United States.
Inasmuch as Mrs. Reagan stated her intention of continuing her role in official White House issues and said that she will continue to protect her husband and “If that interferes with affairs of state, then so be it!” she will now, unless prevented by a responsible elected official, be the functioning President.
Every person of compassion understands the desire of a wife to help and protect her husband, but a cavalier dismissal of interference with “affairs of state” is something else again.
During his eloquent testimony concerning the Iran-Contra affair, the loyal Secretary of State George Shultz strongly defended President Reagan until he castigated him by asking, “How can these things be?”
We must assume that Reagan either is or is not capable of conducting the duties of the presidency. If he is capable, then his wife’s interference with “affairs of state” reflects a brashness and effrontery beyond belief.
If Reagan is not capable of conducting his presidency without the statesmanship of his wife, then he does not belong in office. In viewing this statement we must again echo Shultz: “How can this be?”
JULES SEDER
Studio City
Get the L.A. Times Politics newsletter
Deeply reported insights into legislation, politics and policy from Sacramento, Washington and beyond. In your inbox three times per week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
